Posted Apr 8, 2019, 3:53 PM UTC
This particular thread has hard-to-read rules because it started on April Fool's Day
Hard to read? What? Lemme see.
KULTUR WAR RUN UP FOR DA FIRST OF APRIL
OK BOYZ, DIS HERE IS DA THREAD. FOR THOSE GITZ NEW TO DA GAME DA RULE OF DUMB IS DIS; IF ITZ KONTROVERSAL IT GOEZ 'ERE
DEEZ R DA RULZ OF DA THREAD
Oh. Hmmm. Okay. Very, uh, tasteful? Hadn't noticed that. Thanks for pointing it out I guess.
The real question though, is why the fuck does darwin2500 still bother posting on TheMotte?
I've said it before, but I'm pretty sure darwin is actually a sincere, serious rationalist, and is personally worried by SSC/TheMotte's slide into fascism. If I actually gave a shit about the rationalist community, I would probably be more invested in fighting it out too. Though I'd like to think my reaction would be to stop identifying with the community that keeps attracting and not rebuking open fascists.
accusing someone of "textbook waging the culture war" is textbook waging the culture war
Can't find textbook on Amazon. Please send photocopies of the pages. Have exam in three hours.
Also I think it’s funny how reliably reactionaries blow up over stuff like “angry white male studies” and Gillette commercials telling them to respect women while expecting huge uproar over obvious bait like “it’s okay to be white” that never actually materializes.
You can tell that they’re trying very hard to be serious and Not Mad over this but as soon as you question what’s actually wrong about it the mods ban you for not accepting their narrative as a basic premise of the discussion’s very civility.
I almost want to e-mail a link to r/themotte to the professor teaching the course. Toward the end of the semester they could get into metastudies, white anger directed at discussions of white anger. "The topic of this week's lecture is 'White Anger, But With Glasses On.'"
Calling a sub-bloc of white males "angry"? Totally waging the culture war and worthy of a 1 week ban.
Calling trans men "a bunch of weirdos?" Lol totally cool it's not even pejorative besides white people get called WEIRD too so think of my feelings okay plus it's fine that one guy caught absolutely no moderator action after he ignored the mods request to tone it down this totally isn't just an alt-right sub besides did you know "weird" is a synonym for "queer" lol harmless.
[–]the_nybblerThe Hot Needle of Inquiry 4 points 2 days ago
The acronym does not spell out WEIRD by accident.
OH MY GOD
Gillette commercials telling them to respect women
People who display vitriol at being told to be respectful are tacitly admitting to being assholes.
Also, I know it's a cliche, but at least 50%, probably more, of the comments in the thread underneath the top parent comment here are totally unmoderated pure "waging the culture war"
No they aren't. They're asserting conservative beliefs as fact. "Waging the culture war" means "saying anything liberal ever".
It's all double standards. They make the most sweeping generalizations of the left, then get mad when we do the same in turn to all these fascist entryists abusing liberals' benefit of the doubt.
YoU'rE jUsT bEiNg uNcHaRiTaBlE bans
Their ideal of "free speech" is The Rubin Report, a safe space for crypto-rightists ("classical liberals") to rag on the left and just ask questions about cultural Marxism, human skull size diversity, and white ethnostates. It's all super-softball - you must take Richard Spencer at his word and never assume the worst of him.
[deleted]
Bonus white nationalism in the replies, with many upvotes.
It's posts like that that make you realize how far gone TheMotte is. It's not just that the post is regurgitating white nationalist talking points, but the responses. The guy arguing with him is being incredibly careful to avoid any insinuation that white nationalist talking points are false, he just wants to make it clear that asserting those claims is Bad Form. Because heaven forbid that we just tell racists that they're racist.
They were upvoting Lost Cause talking points the other day too. The sub is very obviously a haven for white supremacists.
I've also seen abortion = infanticide upvoted
Responses to "Do you think this course will be about how white men are angry because our governments imported masses of people from the third world and let them rape our kids? [etc]"
This is an interesting post with a tone and offering that doesn't jive with the thread. I don't exactly disagree with it but I'd never agree with it being said this way ... Not even necessarily because of the implications but because it sounds a bit too hot headed and not on the level.
And
Personally, I think you have the core of a decent point, just made in a terribly unhelpful way.
Hide your power level bro
Literal Stormfront talking points
This is an interesting post with a tone and offering that doesn't jive with the thread. I don't exactly disagree with it but I'd never agree with it being said this way ... Not even necessarily because of the implications but because it sounds a bit too hot headed and not on the level.
Mm, yes, quite interesting.
i wonder if the split from the main SSC subreddit has made the white nationalism more explicit? scott is less likely to show up in the comments and tell them to hide their power level in order to avoid scaring the normies
I dunno. The guy talking about the "unquantifiable White aesthetics" and how the fourteen words where the best foundation for society did it on r/SSC. The guy who said that his only difference of opinion with ISIS was on slavery did it on r/SSC. I think it's just that loudly advertising your opposition to people who fight against racism attracts racists.
I personally think themotte is a bit worse than ssc
Do you think it will say we are angry because our goverments have spent decades systematically replacing us
Lacks that je ne sais quoi that comes with polo shirts and tiki torches.
Y’know when 1st world countries actually go about systematically replacing an inconvenient population, it looks a lot different from, say, subway ads depicting interracial couples.
..If I was capable of regretting verbosity, I might regret answering you. Thankfully I don't, so you get the gracious gift of my rambling commentary, but such a question does not in fact deserve an answer in words.
Total non-sequitur here, but it just amazes me how weird the commenters are. Have you ever met someone like this in your life who did not give off extreme serial killer vibes? Did this person have any social interactions beyond the internet when they were growing up? Who writes out something like this and believes they are sane?
can you imagine just how much Nietzsche would have hated his fans
Did this person have any social interactions beyond the internet when they were growing up?
No
bunch of weirdos
Dying wizards
"white male persecution complex" == "getting shamed for berating and beating women and minorities is worse than actual starvation and genocide"
Literal First World Problems
There should be a reality TV show where they try to demonstrate on camera how their lives are worse than Third Worlders', kind of like that one episode of An Idiot Abroad where Ricky Gervais's friend had to sleep in squalid accommodations like his driver in India. Nothing like watching yourself on film to see the extent of delusion.
"Women's Studies", as implied by the genitive, is assumed to be studies that belong to women, i.e. "women studying things that they care about". I don't think "Angry White Male Studies" carries any connotation that the angry white males in question would be the subject, rather than the object, of the studies. To properly flip the script, do you think a "Women Studies" department, staffed by men speculating about what makes women tick, would be well-received?
Lol, what? I have never heard this idea posited. Wikipedia certainly doesn't agree. I've always operated under the impression that "Women's Studies" are the study of women in the context of society; I've never considered them to be "studies done by women".
Compare "African American Studies" or "Asian American Studies". All of these fields are about studying the groups in question. I don't think there's anything offensive about that?
I also don't think there's anything inherently wrong with a white professor of AFAM Studies or a male professor of women's studies. I have heard of several and never heard anything but positive things about them. So why is it so terrifying that a woman or POC might study and teach on the subject of white men?
There are men who do women's studies lol!
Also, check out this guy who seems to think that self-report surveys must give you "the right answer" to an entire field of study:
Funny thing is, you could do a scientific research on topic of "angry white males". Like, you could ask random men, how often they get angry and what is the reason for that. And then publish the results, like 50% are most angry at their boss, 20% at the economical situation in general, 15% at their wives or girlfriends, etc. (numbers made up).
Yet, it is not difficult to predict that the result of such research would not be accepted as the right answer at the "angry white male studies".
Like, of course it's not difficult to predict that these wouldn't be accepted as a definitive result: they wouldn't be one.
You would think a community dedicated to truth-seeking would have figured out that "just ask people" is not the pinnacle of social science research.
What's even more crazy is that, in basically any other circumstance, they'd be against "just asking people": you just have to see how they react to ideas like "believe victims." This kind of data is only acceptable to them if (they believe) it goes their way.
"Angry young men" is not a term already in wide use by the left as an attack. "Angry white male" is.
"Male" also carries a context of dehumanization.
Just because it's easy, did a comment search,
Conan has a code of honor and doesn't rape. Spike doing so was an attempt by a female writer to flip the gender on a real-life incident, and became rape because there's a sexual double standard about what counts as rape.
...
Even ordinary people who aren't social justice warriors could think this is meant for a male audience and has little to do with strong independent female characters
...
I think this is pretty clearly false for the example of female action heroes on TV before Xena.
...
I think people quoting examples of female leads are missing the point.
...
Kale is one of two female Saiyans introduced in Dragonball Super. She was obviously meant to be like a female version of Broly.
OK I guess it doesn't count as dehumanizing since Saiyans are not technically human but humanoid, as long as there's no full moon of course.
decoupling intensifies
Isn't that a requirement to post on TheMotte?
Weird, I’d be inclined to think that the person analogizing “angry white male,” a descriptor of the self-professed emotions of the demographic in question, to the most distasteful slur in the English language would be the one who is on the highest level of “ignoring all context.”
Should'a been called Gammons.
Rationalism in a nutshell